[Bug 20164] excessive margins cause too much wasted vertical space

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20164

David Kirstein (Frozenice) <frozenice@frozenice.de> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |komoroske@google.com

--- Comment #3 from David Kirstein (Frozenice) <frozenice@frozenice.de> ---
You are right that the Values items are ordered by creation. That order can be
changed manually by dragging the arrow thingy right next to the remove button,
in the edit form under Values.

Sorting the Syntax items in the same way (as authored) is a bit tricky. It
should work as long as the list contains less than 10 items. The problem is,
the Semantic Internal Objects get created with an internal name like this:
  css/properties/break-after#1  (auto)
  css/properties/break-after#2  (always)
  [...]
  css/properties/break-after#9  (avoid-column)
  css/properties/break-after#10 (region)
  css/properties/break-after#11 (avoid-region)

Unfortunately the Syntax items are retrieved using #ask, using the internal
name for sorting (it gets passed as the mainlabel and is automatically a
property of type Page). The names don't get sorted in natural order, but are
compared as normal strings, thus it becomes #1 #10 #11 #2 etc.

My current thinking is to add some kind of index to the #set_internal call in 
Template:CSS_Property_Value, which would become the 4th property of the
internal object, that could be used for sorting in #ask (would be of type
number ofc, so SMW uses numerical sort). I'm thinking a combination of #expr
and Extension:Variables or some alternative.

I also had the Syntax list ordered alphabetically, but that seemed confusing, 2
lists with different order. Also, if the editor wants to sort the values
alphabetically, he has to sort them manually (using the arrow thingy), there
might be a way to include a "sort alphabetically" button in the edit form
through some JS hackery, but I'm not really sure if that's feasable.

CC'ing Alex for this one (ideas? is there an easier way? should we go for the
index?)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Received on Friday, 30 November 2012 08:27:41 UTC